Re: ISPACs

Dave Siegel <dave@rtd.net> Sun, 08 December 1996 06:12 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aj05039; 8 Dec 96 1:12 EST
Received: from nico.aarnet.edu.au by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14464; 7 Dec 96 17:24 EST
Received: from seagull.rtd.com (seagull.rtd.com [198.102.68.2]) by nico.aarnet.edu.au (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id IAA11400 for <cidrd@iepg.org>; Sun, 8 Dec 1996 08:34:53 +1100
Received: (from dsiegel@localhost) by seagull.rtd.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA06270; Sat, 7 Dec 1996 14:34:44 -0700 (MST)
From: Dave Siegel <dave@rtd.net>
Message-Id: <199612072134.OAA06270@seagull.rtd.com>
Subject: Re: ISPACs
To: "Justin W. Newton" <justin@erols.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 1996 14:34:44 -0700
Cc: tli@jnx.com, cidrd@iepg.org
In-Reply-To: <3.0b36.32.19961206152653.0090e270@justin.erols.com> from "Justin W. Newton" at Dec 6, 96 03:26:54 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> >   interconnect model does improve things, but that takes us back to a
> >   provider based model where the people running the interconnect are a
> >   provider, which leaves us at the current model, no different.
> >
> >I don't follow your leap here to the people running the interconnect being
> >a separate provider.  They're providing a room and bandwidth and mebbe
> >routing services under contract to the ISPAC (as a group).  Does that make
> >them a competitor?  Is MFS a competitor because of MAE-East?
> 
> No, you are missing my point here.  The packets ned to get to the
> interconnect somehow.  There are 2 ways that the packets acn get to the
> interexchange (unless I am missing something very obvious)
> 
> 1) The providers who are members of the ISPAC announce the aggregate
> announcement and then route the specific traffic for individual ISPs to the
> interconnect (or over the interconnect, whatever).
> 
> 2) The interconnect itself advertisies the aggregate announcement and then
> routes to the ISPAC members.
> 
> Setup 1) leads to the problem of dependancy on your competitors to get your
> traffic from the Internet at large.
> 
> Setup 2) basically makes the interconnect provider your upstream provider,
> the same as Sprint, MCI or UUNET would be.
> 
> What am I missing?  (Please use small words as I am obviously missing what
> you are trying to teach me.)

Justin,

I think everyone is aware of the business issues involved in an
ISPAC.

Just because there is an RFC on the matter doesn't mean that Erols is
going to have to join one, but what it does do is provide a document to
registration organizations by which they may base allocations of IP space.

There are certainly places where ISPs have teamed up to provide 
better service to the community at large, and that's perfectly fine.
This document is for them.

Dave

-- 
Dave Siegel		     Sr. Network Engineer, RTD Systems & Networking
(520)623-9663 x130	     Network Consultant -- Regional/National NSPs
dsiegel@rtd.com		     User Tracking & Acctg -- "Written by an ISP, 
http://www.rtd.com/~dsiegel/					for an ISP."